BrightGlow

I don't think the regular user even knows what WebGL and WASM are, they will just wonder why their browser game isn't working and then google the cryptic setting that they have to change to get it to work.

No. I don't want to continue this discussion based on this line of questioning, sorry. Let's be good people and not fight, I'm sure you're a kind soul.

>but the integrity questions still remain.

For those previous elections? No, they don't. The elections themselves are settled. You are asking questions about something different which is future elections, that's an entirely different question and it's a mistake to conflate them entirely with past elections.

>I feel like too many people are declaring the suspicions as moot and settled without actually looking taking the time and effort to investigate fully and properly

I really wish you would stop coming at it from this angle, it's not a productive way to look at things. The suspicions are moot and are settled by the courts. That is a fact. The elections are over. No amount of investigation is going to change the results of those past elections. No matter how many more people you get to investigate this, it isn't going to change it. An investigation could change future elections, but we would only know about that if an investigation was conducted during the period of time when it's legally allowed to happen.

And just to make it clear, there is nothing wrong with having suspicions about holes in an electoral process and discussing what we can do about it. Where you going into bad territory is when you slip in things like "there are open integrity questions" and "the election needs more investigation and isn't settled" and other things that are sowing doubt about the validity of the whole process. In the best case, those statements are misleading, and in the worst case, they're completely false. We may not like that some concerns are dismissed for partisan reasons but you're leaving out how in a lot of cases, that is completely legal and is the system working as intended. I'd love to fix this too but engaging in this type of rhetoric on social media is not going to help there.

Please avoid making this argument, it's a false equivalence. Youtube is not self-censoring those things.

If you want me to ask a similarly misleading line of questioning based only on trying to draw false equivalence from principles: Currently Youtube is self-censoring porn. Is the side of "youtube should become a porn site" really the side you want to root for?

I've read about plenty of this, all of that is completely normal. Every election people will try to game the system. It happens. We deal with it on a case-by-case basis. Sometimes we do a better job than other times. It's not fundamentally different from any other social system.

>does not mean the issue has been decisively proven or disproven

Yeah you're technically right but the point is: that doesn't matter to the election. It's of historical interest only, you can't use it to try to prove that an election didn't happen the right way because our system doesn't work like that. Elections aren't decided based on an investigation that happened 60 years in the future, if that was the case then we could never have an election because we'd have to wait 60 years for the results.

I don't see how I am missing the point. Everything you've said would be mostly within the guidelines. Where you would get into trouble is if you did start saying "Nixon really won" or otherwise trying to say the election was fraudulent, because that would be false. You may want to re-read the guidelines to double check this.

But you may want to be careful with statements like "We now know the 1960 Nixon vs. Kennedy election is suspect". The election is not suspect and the end results (Kennedy won) are not going to change. It was settled decades ago. Specific events like you mention might have been suspect, but the election itself was not, it was settled legally according to the way the system worked at the time.

>the election process is vulnerable to fraud and needs reform or oversight

But that's the thing though, just this saying this on social media in the context of any election is not meaningful and can cause harm, and is causing harm. Every election has statistical oddities, errors, disputes, recounts, and other issues. All of these mentioned election processes already do have oversight and formal reform procedures in place. That's all a normal and expected part of the process. It's a constant ongoing process to improve them. We can never make a perfect system so each election year we just do our best and then resolve the resulting legal disputes in the traditional manner. That's the way the system works.

>It's like a blueprint for what to review further.

Why? Something going viral on social media is not proof or evidence that it happened or not. And as you know, without these policies anyone can spread false information about any election for any reason they want.

And the thing is: we know who won those elections. This is not a matter of dispute, it's legal fact. It's great to review things and to theorize about what would have happened if elections were run differently (there was a lot of this around the 2000 US election for example) but just saying something like "the election was fraud, Gore really won" is egregiously false and does nothing besides undermine the democratic process.

>You could strip out systemd and put in a custom init system that doesn't conform to the typical Unix daemon startup expectations.

I actually don't think you can do this, or would even want to. Systemd doesn't really do anything special beyond putting some tooling around various Linux features. I've seen a lot of other Linux inits and all of them have to conform to those expectations because that is how Unix and Linux are supposed to function, if the init doesn't do those jobs then the system doesn't work.

>You could write your own X11/wayland-like display server thing (like Android does)

Conceptually the Android window system is not really that different from Wayland. X11 is more the outlier. If you're building a new window system, you probably want to do things with a very similar approach to how Wayland and SurfaceFlinger work. No matter what you do there you're going to be constrained by the requirements of getting OpenGL and Vulkan apps to work.

You spent a lot of time explaining this and I agree with everything you said. But that's a really long-winded technologist's way of putting it. I'd personally phrase in a simpler way: music is useless and has no value. It serves no purpose besides entertainment. It can be made trivially for literally zero cost by anyone who has working hands or vocal cords, no technology or investment is required. NFTs certainly don't and can't change this. (Disclaimer: I am a musician and I've spent a lot of time working on music apps. It's a hard sell out there for everybody)

I tried really hard to like SerenityOS but I think the decision to make it a UNIX-like POSIX system is a mistake. The POSIX API is outdated and broken in a lot of ways. I wish people would stop making UNIX-like operating systems, we have enough of those to deal with considering just the Linuxes and the BSDs.

With a reputation system you'd still want to do your due diligence and manually check things. Even the most trustworthy people make honest mistakes sometimes.

Blind people can also get malware...

Not sure about other browsers but this is incorrect for Chrome and Firefox. They both have flags to disable WebGL and WASM. Please be careful not to spread misinformation, we owe it to ourselves to research our posts well.